Gotta follow-up on what Alex has added here. After a member gets his/her three signatures, we don't just turn over and key and be done with it. There's actually a *really important* step beyond getting those signatures, and that's the key-holder tour.
"With great power comes great responsibility" (shout out to Spider-Man's uncle). It's on me, the person who's running Indy Hall on a daily basis, to show the new key-holding member not just how to be a key-holding member, but why it's so so so significant. It's a huge gesture to offer 24/7 access to anyone, and on my side, it's a major assist to me doing my job well. If someone's earned the trust of three other key-holders here, I'm adding another set of eyes and ears to my network of people who care just as much as I do, people who can help me take care of this place and the people here. Before beginning a tour of Indy Hall, I make sure that person knows this. Offering praise and thanks for taking the time to earn trust from the people that I trust is a big deal, and the person you're reporting this too ought to know that. The key-holder tour is a lot like the first tour that member had when s/he first visited, but it's through the lens of a person who's been asked to take extra care of this place. Getting a key doesn't cost more money, but it absolutely asks for even more responsibility. "Treat this place like you would your own home, because it is *your* home. You can open up in the morning, lock it down at night, host events and meetings over the weekend, etc. Close the windows, mind the lights, let someone know if the kitchen is a total mess, make sure the turtle isn't dead (this is important). More importantly than anything else, members who are not key-holders are looking to you now to set a serious example of what it takes to look after this place. Set the standard for every future member, key-holding or not." It's like that. And that second tour serves as both a reminder of things they may have forgotten over time and also as a realization that they're now being asked to be in this coworking space with a new, leveled-up perspective. It's a very. Big. Deal. Someone who's had that tour vs. someone who has a key but DIDN'T get that tour shows a huuuuge difference in the way a key-holder acts. On Thursday, September 11, 2014 9:38:16 AM UTC-4, Alex Hillman wrote: > > It's a trust network, not a blame network :) > > More importantly, the signatures themselves aren't the point. They're an > action that someone has to take to get to know people who already care > enough to look after the things worth protecting. > > Even a background check company doesn't have that incentive: the best they > can do is tell you about recorded red flags and legal infractions, not that > somebody is going to be disrespectful or problematic (which is > statistically more likely than having an actual criminal try to JOIN in a > long-com operation). > > Worth noting: we've made tweaks to the signature model since we invented > it, the most important being that we make sure that the new keyholder > > a) gets signatures from outside of their pre-existing circles. This means > that for people who become new full time members as part of an existing > team who works at Indy Hall, they need to get their sign off from people > NOT on their team. We explain to them why the process is in place and > everybody has understood and appreciated it > > b) they need to be able to say who signed their sheet after turning it > over to us. Some people were just going around and getting signatures > without actually getting to know people. If they can't even remember the > name of who signed off on them, the signature doesn't count because they > didn't hold up their end of the deal that makes the process work. > > There's a recent thread in the google group archives where I explained how > little ACTUAL overnight/24 hour use happens, but I can't seem to copy the > link to that thread form mobile :) if someone else can grab it before I do > and post it here that'd be awesome. > > > -- > /ah > indyhall.org > > > On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Tom Brandt <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> I worded that poorly. The supporting members are saying that they trust >> this person to be a member, they are not guaranteeing it. If the new member >> violates that trust, I am sure the supporting members would feel badly, but >> nothing would happen to them. >> >> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:55 AM, Marius Amado-Alves <[email protected] >> <javascript:>> wrote: >> >>> ... the signatures of three members who will vouch for them as good >>>> fits for membership. >>>> >>> >>> Just curious, should the new member mischieve, what would happen to the >>> supporting members. >>> >>>> -- >>> Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Coworking" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected] <javascript:>. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> twb >> member, Workantile <http://workantile.com/> >> @twbrandt >> >> -- >> Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Coworking" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] <javascript:>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Coworking" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
